Illegal and Legal DVD Copying - Very Controversial Topics

March 31st, 2009

Legal DVD copying is a highly controversial subject and is often the topic of heated debates, especially since nobody can agree on what the laws actually mean. Is it illegal to copy dvd’s? Even as backup copies for personal use? If a consumer goes to the store and buys a DVD the legal way, brings it home only to find out that it skips in some places, is it still illegal for the consumer to burn a working copy of it for personal use?

Read more

Posted in Copyright Definition | No Comments »

The Movie & Music Industries Need to Get Smarter

March 30th, 2009

This blog entry will not be a review about the movie Get Smart, although my experiences with watching the movie and trying to LEGALLY put it on my laptop have shown me something about the movie distributors, production company, the movie industry and its studios, or whoever.

In the last year or so, it’s become more common place, depending on the movie studio, to release DVDs with a legal ‘digital copy’ of a movie to put on your computer or media playing device, provided you go online or through their instructions, and usually provide a password or code they give you in the packaging of the DVD. But the basic idea is if you buy the DVD, you have a legal and “easy” way of putting the file on your computer without having to rip the disc or download the movie from a file sharing program.  A great solution the movie industry thought it had to the whole file sharing and piracy problem, right?

I travel a lot and like having my movies and CDs on my laptop and/or possibly my iPod, and the ‘backups’ are in boxes in my parents’ basement in Canada.  Being on long flights, and many churches increasingly creating video podcasts of their sermons, such a device was also convenient for that purpose. I’ve even gotten in the habit of renting movies in iTunes before going on a long flight, bus or train ride, or just when I’m going to be traveling or doing something that puts a lot of time on my hands.

Well, I come to find that in order to get the digital copy one has to use Windows Media Player, because the movie studio doesn’t co-operate with Apple or iTunes, and I own a MacBook. Now, I know I’m in the minority and that more people use Microsoft-based computers than Apple MacIntosh computers, but to the best of my knowledge, iPod devices and the iPhone make up over 70% of the total market for mp3 players and media sharing devices (this might even be a conservative estimate—I’ve heard much higher). The Microsoft Zune hasn’t even had an accumulated total number of units sold (in over 2 years) of just how many iPods Apple has in the last financial quarter of 2008 alone–for just one competitor’s example.

My point is this: if the big wigs at movie studios want to stop piracy, and have people legitimately buy or legally put their own property (the DVD) on a media playing device, why not give them the option of allowing it to be compatible with whatever device the consumer owns, instead of the one the studio determines? I realize competitiveness and the free market are at play in this situation, but still, this matter is quite stupid, because the very problem they’re trying to solve, they’re actually creating when consumers don’t use the software or the device they’ve made their digital copy compatible with.

What?  I can’t get the digital copy from my DVD of The Dark Knight?  Fine, I’ll just go to bit torrent to get it.

This causes many to go download programs from off the ‘net and just rip the DVD to their hard drive in mp4 format compatible with iPods.

I recently rented Get Smart (a very funny movie) on iTunes, and watched it to relax after work one night before going to bed. I enjoyed it (and recommend it since it was clean and almost no cussing or suggestive stuff, and it was FUNNY as heck). I suggested it to my brother the next day–we both were working together at the same place of employment. He gave me the idea to buy the DVD for him for Christmas, so I picked the one out from Future Shop that had a digital copy for a few dollars more than the normal edition, so I also could benefit from legally owning it as well.  In this case, the digital copy was compatible with iTunes, and with the 2nd disc and a connection to the internet one can download the video to their movie library in under five minutes if they have an iTunes account. This was a smart move on this movie supplier’s side to increase the ease with which consumers can access the digital copy should they want to. However, the DVD my brother bought for me for Christmas–The Dark Knight–is not compatible with iTunes or Apple despite being released by the same DVD supplier. *Sigh*

Why can’t ALL the movie industries out there ‘get smart’ about how they solve the problem of file sharing, torrents, and movie piracy by offering a solution that the average law abiding consumer will WANT to cooperate with, instead of making it so difficult and creating the rules for what devices and media players one has to already have in order to benefit from the digital copy on the disc?

I try abiding by their rules and legalities, but they make it so ridiculous and almost impossible to do the right thing (or just the thing they want) –it’s no wonder many people just go to file sharing and piracy to obtain the movies they’d like to watch! By the way, despite my ranting, it’s worth letting you know that the only movies on my laptop are ones that I’ve purchased in DVD form or had given to me, and the music I listen to is all purchased or from CDs or iTunes gift cards given to me. I’ve run into the same type of snag with the DRM on songs I’ve purchased online in that I can’t make mix mp3 CDs to listen to on my mp3 ghetto blaster at work.

I appreciate the effort the movie industries, and even the recording industry are trying to make, but it’s really ridiculous, and they need to get smarter about how they want the consumer to play along. I’ve gone and downloaded software to allow me to listen to music I PAID for, the way I want to–that removes the DRM on my songs, and I’ve decided to just resort to ripping DVDs to my computer since less than 1/3 of the DVDs I’ve bought, or had given to me, in the last year are compatible with the devices I use to legally watch them.

I’m sorry movie and music industry, but I’ve played by your rules and you need to get smart if you want most of society to abide by them. I’m sure I speak for many others when I say I’m getting tired of them…

Read more

Posted in Copyright Definition | No Comments »

Content Theft - 4 Simple Steps For Protecting Your Copyright

March 29th, 2009

Since we’re not living in a perfect world, unfair and unpleasant things happen every day. If you’re an ezine articles author, content theft is one of these unpleasant happenings. How to fight against it and how to protect your copyright?

Read more

Posted in Copyright Definition | No Comments »

The Movie & Music Industries Need to Get Smarter

March 28th, 2009

This blog entry will not be a review about the movie Get Smart, although my experiences with watching the movie and trying to LEGALLY put it on my laptop have shown me something about the movie distributors, production company, the movie industry and its studios, or whoever.

In the last year or so, it’s become more common place, depending on the movie studio, to release DVDs with a legal ‘digital copy’ of a movie to put on your computer or media playing device, provided you go online or through their instructions, and usually provide a password or code they give you in the packaging of the DVD. But the basic idea is if you buy the DVD, you have a legal and “easy” way of putting the file on your computer without having to rip the disc or download the movie from a file sharing program.  A great solution the movie industry thought it had to the whole file sharing and piracy problem, right?

I travel a lot and like having my movies and CDs on my laptop and/or possibly my iPod, and the ‘backups’ are in boxes in my parents’ basement in Canada.  Being on long flights, and many churches increasingly creating video podcasts of their sermons, such a device was also convenient for that purpose. I’ve even gotten in the habit of renting movies in iTunes before going on a long flight, bus or train ride, or just when I’m going to be traveling or doing something that puts a lot of time on my hands.

Well, I come to find that in order to get the digital copy one has to use Windows Media Player, because the movie studio doesn’t co-operate with Apple or iTunes, and I own a MacBook. Now, I know I’m in the minority and that more people use Microsoft-based computers than Apple MacIntosh computers, but to the best of my knowledge, iPod devices and the iPhone make up over 70% of the total market for mp3 players and media sharing devices (this might even be a conservative estimate—I’ve heard much higher). The Microsoft Zune hasn’t even had an accumulated total number of units sold (in over 2 years) of just how many iPods Apple has in the last financial quarter of 2008 alone–for just one competitor’s example.

My point is this: if the big wigs at movie studios want to stop piracy, and have people legitimately buy or legally put their own property (the DVD) on a media playing device, why not give them the option of allowing it to be compatible with whatever device the consumer owns, instead of the one the studio determines? I realize competitiveness and the free market are at play in this situation, but still, this matter is quite stupid, because the very problem they’re trying to solve, they’re actually creating when consumers don’t use the software or the device they’ve made their digital copy compatible with.

What?  I can’t get the digital copy from my DVD of The Dark Knight?  Fine, I’ll just go to bit torrent to get it.

This causes many to go download programs from off the ‘net and just rip the DVD to their hard drive in mp4 format compatible with iPods.

I recently rented Get Smart (a very funny movie) on iTunes, and watched it to relax after work one night before going to bed. I enjoyed it (and recommend it since it was clean and almost no cussing or suggestive stuff, and it was FUNNY as heck). I suggested it to my brother the next day–we both were working together at the same place of employment. He gave me the idea to buy the DVD for him for Christmas, so I picked the one out from Future Shop that had a digital copy for a few dollars more than the normal edition, so I also could benefit from legally owning it as well.  In this case, the digital copy was compatible with iTunes, and with the 2nd disc and a connection to the internet one can download the video to their movie library in under five minutes if they have an iTunes account. This was a smart move on this movie supplier’s side to increase the ease with which consumers can access the digital copy should they want to. However, the DVD my brother bought for me for Christmas–The Dark Knight–is not compatible with iTunes or Apple despite being released by the same DVD supplier. *Sigh*

Why can’t ALL the movie industries out there ‘get smart’ about how they solve the problem of file sharing, torrents, and movie piracy by offering a solution that the average law abiding consumer will WANT to cooperate with, instead of making it so difficult and creating the rules for what devices and media players one has to already have in order to benefit from the digital copy on the disc?

I try abiding by their rules and legalities, but they make it so ridiculous and almost impossible to do the right thing (or just the thing they want) –it’s no wonder many people just go to file sharing and piracy to obtain the movies they’d like to watch! By the way, despite my ranting, it’s worth letting you know that the only movies on my laptop are ones that I’ve purchased in DVD form or had given to me, and the music I listen to is all purchased or from CDs or iTunes gift cards given to me. I’ve run into the same type of snag with the DRM on songs I’ve purchased online in that I can’t make mix mp3 CDs to listen to on my mp3 ghetto blaster at work.

I appreciate the effort the movie industries, and even the recording industry are trying to make, but it’s really ridiculous, and they need to get smarter about how they want the consumer to play along. I’ve gone and downloaded software to allow me to listen to music I PAID for, the way I want to–that removes the DRM on my songs, and I’ve decided to just resort to ripping DVDs to my computer since less than 1/3 of the DVDs I’ve bought, or had given to me, in the last year are compatible with the devices I use to legally watch them.

I’m sorry movie and music industry, but I’ve played by your rules and you need to get smart if you want most of society to abide by them. I’m sure I speak for many others when I say I’m getting tired of them…

Read more

Posted in Copyright Definition | No Comments »

Poor Man’s Copyright - Legally Binding?

March 27th, 2009

Getting copyright for your own original work is something that is advised under the law, particularly if there is something about your work that makes it likely to be either copied or used for any purpose against your will. Being the creator of a piece of work is something that can provide both financial riches and personal kudos. If, however, you have not copyrighted this work, you will have problems trying to prove ownership further down the line.

Of course, copyrighting your work will cost money. This is all very well and good if you are a successful artist who has been selling their pieces for some time and has the money in the bank to pay copyright fees. The expense is not huge - especially when compared with some other legal services - but it still brings into the matter a question of whether copyright law discriminates against poor, struggling artists. If you happen to have an idea that you imagine may well be lucrative, but not the money to copyright it, then you may feel that you are being unfairly prevented from protecting your idea.

One solution that has been mooted in this situation is the practice known as “Poor Man’s Copyright”. As the name suggests, it is a way of demonstrating that one has taken action to protect their idea, and doing so without having to spend a large amount of money when one cannot reasonably afford to. The practice itself is fairly straightforward and simple, and based in some genuinely clever thinking. The idea is that if you take a copy of the work and send it to yourself through the mail, there will be a date postmarked on the envelope showing when it was sent. If someone then tries to copy your work or pass a version of it off as their own you have a way of showing that you had the idea first and took steps to protect it.

The fact is, however, that Poor Man’s Copyright is not legally binding. No provision is made in US copyright law regarding such protection, so people responsible for original work are still required to put it through the process of applying for copyright if they want total, full copyright protection. This is not an advantageous situation for anyone who has an idea while down on their luck financially.

However, it is still worth going through the process of sending the work to yourself. It can be used as evidence where there is reasonable doubt, and more importantly it can be a way of providing notice to any potential plagiarist that you are mindful of people trying to steal your ideas. In any potential case where you may sue for plagiarism, it is always desirable to be as fully armed as possible for any legal battle. After all, it is potentially a question of substantial, repeated future earnings and you want to put your foot down to protect those.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational and entertainment purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter.

LegalBuffet.com is a complete online resource that compares the legal services offered by various online companies. Find the best company for your copyright needs at http://legalbuffet.com/copyright-services /.

Read more

Posted in Copyright Definition | No Comments »

The Movie & Music Industries Need to Get Smarter

March 26th, 2009

This blog entry will not be a review about the movie Get Smart, although my experiences with watching the movie and trying to LEGALLY put it on my laptop have shown me something about the movie distributors, production company, the movie industry and its studios, or whoever.

In the last year or so, it’s become more common place, depending on the movie studio, to release DVDs with a legal ‘digital copy’ of a movie to put on your computer or media playing device, provided you go online or through their instructions, and usually provide a password or code they give you in the packaging of the DVD. But the basic idea is if you buy the DVD, you have a legal and “easy” way of putting the file on your computer without having to rip the disc or download the movie from a file sharing program.  A great solution the movie industry thought it had to the whole file sharing and piracy problem, right?

I travel a lot and like having my movies and CDs on my laptop and/or possibly my iPod, and the ‘backups’ are in boxes in my parents’ basement in Canada.  Being on long flights, and many churches increasingly creating video podcasts of their sermons, such a device was also convenient for that purpose. I’ve even gotten in the habit of renting movies in iTunes before going on a long flight, bus or train ride, or just when I’m going to be traveling or doing something that puts a lot of time on my hands.

Well, I come to find that in order to get the digital copy one has to use Windows Media Player, because the movie studio doesn’t co-operate with Apple or iTunes, and I own a MacBook. Now, I know I’m in the minority and that more people use Microsoft-based computers than Apple MacIntosh computers, but to the best of my knowledge, iPod devices and the iPhone make up over 70% of the total market for mp3 players and media sharing devices (this might even be a conservative estimate—I’ve heard much higher). The Microsoft Zune hasn’t even had an accumulated total number of units sold (in over 2 years) of just how many iPods Apple has in the last financial quarter of 2008 alone–for just one competitor’s example.

My point is this: if the big wigs at movie studios want to stop piracy, and have people legitimately buy or legally put their own property (the DVD) on a media playing device, why not give them the option of allowing it to be compatible with whatever device the consumer owns, instead of the one the studio determines? I realize competitiveness and the free market are at play in this situation, but still, this matter is quite stupid, because the very problem they’re trying to solve, they’re actually creating when consumers don’t use the software or the device they’ve made their digital copy compatible with.

What?  I can’t get the digital copy from my DVD of The Dark Knight?  Fine, I’ll just go to bit torrent to get it.

This causes many to go download programs from off the ‘net and just rip the DVD to their hard drive in mp4 format compatible with iPods.

I recently rented Get Smart (a very funny movie) on iTunes, and watched it to relax after work one night before going to bed. I enjoyed it (and recommend it since it was clean and almost no cussing or suggestive stuff, and it was FUNNY as heck). I suggested it to my brother the next day–we both were working together at the same place of employment. He gave me the idea to buy the DVD for him for Christmas, so I picked the one out from Future Shop that had a digital copy for a few dollars more than the normal edition, so I also could benefit from legally owning it as well.  In this case, the digital copy was compatible with iTunes, and with the 2nd disc and a connection to the internet one can download the video to their movie library in under five minutes if they have an iTunes account. This was a smart move on this movie supplier’s side to increase the ease with which consumers can access the digital copy should they want to. However, the DVD my brother bought for me for Christmas–The Dark Knight–is not compatible with iTunes or Apple despite being released by the same DVD supplier. *Sigh*

Why can’t ALL the movie industries out there ‘get smart’ about how they solve the problem of file sharing, torrents, and movie piracy by offering a solution that the average law abiding consumer will WANT to cooperate with, instead of making it so difficult and creating the rules for what devices and media players one has to already have in order to benefit from the digital copy on the disc?

I try abiding by their rules and legalities, but they make it so ridiculous and almost impossible to do the right thing (or just the thing they want) –it’s no wonder many people just go to file sharing and piracy to obtain the movies they’d like to watch! By the way, despite my ranting, it’s worth letting you know that the only movies on my laptop are ones that I’ve purchased in DVD form or had given to me, and the music I listen to is all purchased or from CDs or iTunes gift cards given to me. I’ve run into the same type of snag with the DRM on songs I’ve purchased online in that I can’t make mix mp3 CDs to listen to on my mp3 ghetto blaster at work.

I appreciate the effort the movie industries, and even the recording industry are trying to make, but it’s really ridiculous, and they need to get smarter about how they want the consumer to play along. I’ve gone and downloaded software to allow me to listen to music I PAID for, the way I want to–that removes the DRM on my songs, and I’ve decided to just resort to ripping DVDs to my computer since less than 1/3 of the DVDs I’ve bought, or had given to me, in the last year are compatible with the devices I use to legally watch them.

I’m sorry movie and music industry, but I’ve played by your rules and you need to get smart if you want most of society to abide by them. I’m sure I speak for many others when I say I’m getting tired of them…

Read more

Posted in Copyright Definition | No Comments »

Cease & Desist Letters, Threat Letters and Notice of Infringement Letters - What You Need to Know

March 25th, 2009

A trademark or domain name threat letter is basically what it sounds like. It’s a letter or a sometimes an email from an alleged trademark owner with a threat to take legal action if you do not stop using their trademark registration, domain name, etc.

Read more

Posted in Copyright Definition | No Comments »

The Movie & Music Industries Need to Get Smarter

March 24th, 2009

This blog entry will not be a review about the movie Get Smart, although my experiences with watching the movie and trying to LEGALLY put it on my laptop have shown me something about the movie distributors, production company, the movie industry and its studios, or whoever.

In the last year or so, it’s become more common place, depending on the movie studio, to release DVDs with a legal ‘digital copy’ of a movie to put on your computer or media playing device, provided you go online or through their instructions, and usually provide a password or code they give you in the packaging of the DVD. But the basic idea is if you buy the DVD, you have a legal and “easy” way of putting the file on your computer without having to rip the disc or download the movie from a file sharing program.  A great solution the movie industry thought it had to the whole file sharing and piracy problem, right?

I travel a lot and like having my movies and CDs on my laptop and/or possibly my iPod, and the ‘backups’ are in boxes in my parents’ basement in Canada.  Being on long flights, and many churches increasingly creating video podcasts of their sermons, such a device was also convenient for that purpose. I’ve even gotten in the habit of renting movies in iTunes before going on a long flight, bus or train ride, or just when I’m going to be traveling or doing something that puts a lot of time on my hands.

Well, I come to find that in order to get the digital copy one has to use Windows Media Player, because the movie studio doesn’t co-operate with Apple or iTunes, and I own a MacBook. Now, I know I’m in the minority and that more people use Microsoft-based computers than Apple MacIntosh computers, but to the best of my knowledge, iPod devices and the iPhone make up over 70% of the total market for mp3 players and media sharing devices (this might even be a conservative estimate—I’ve heard much higher). The Microsoft Zune hasn’t even had an accumulated total number of units sold (in over 2 years) of just how many iPods Apple has in the last financial quarter of 2008 alone–for just one competitor’s example.

My point is this: if the big wigs at movie studios want to stop piracy, and have people legitimately buy or legally put their own property (the DVD) on a media playing device, why not give them the option of allowing it to be compatible with whatever device the consumer owns, instead of the one the studio determines? I realize competitiveness and the free market are at play in this situation, but still, this matter is quite stupid, because the very problem they’re trying to solve, they’re actually creating when consumers don’t use the software or the device they’ve made their digital copy compatible with.

What?  I can’t get the digital copy from my DVD of The Dark Knight?  Fine, I’ll just go to bit torrent to get it.

This causes many to go download programs from off the ‘net and just rip the DVD to their hard drive in mp4 format compatible with iPods.

I recently rented Get Smart (a very funny movie) on iTunes, and watched it to relax after work one night before going to bed. I enjoyed it (and recommend it since it was clean and almost no cussing or suggestive stuff, and it was FUNNY as heck). I suggested it to my brother the next day–we both were working together at the same place of employment. He gave me the idea to buy the DVD for him for Christmas, so I picked the one out from Future Shop that had a digital copy for a few dollars more than the normal edition, so I also could benefit from legally owning it as well.  In this case, the digital copy was compatible with iTunes, and with the 2nd disc and a connection to the internet one can download the video to their movie library in under five minutes if they have an iTunes account. This was a smart move on this movie supplier’s side to increase the ease with which consumers can access the digital copy should they want to. However, the DVD my brother bought for me for Christmas–The Dark Knight–is not compatible with iTunes or Apple despite being released by the same DVD supplier. *Sigh*

Why can’t ALL the movie industries out there ‘get smart’ about how they solve the problem of file sharing, torrents, and movie piracy by offering a solution that the average law abiding consumer will WANT to cooperate with, instead of making it so difficult and creating the rules for what devices and media players one has to already have in order to benefit from the digital copy on the disc?

I try abiding by their rules and legalities, but they make it so ridiculous and almost impossible to do the right thing (or just the thing they want) –it’s no wonder many people just go to file sharing and piracy to obtain the movies they’d like to watch! By the way, despite my ranting, it’s worth letting you know that the only movies on my laptop are ones that I’ve purchased in DVD form or had given to me, and the music I listen to is all purchased or from CDs or iTunes gift cards given to me. I’ve run into the same type of snag with the DRM on songs I’ve purchased online in that I can’t make mix mp3 CDs to listen to on my mp3 ghetto blaster at work.

I appreciate the effort the movie industries, and even the recording industry are trying to make, but it’s really ridiculous, and they need to get smarter about how they want the consumer to play along. I’ve gone and downloaded software to allow me to listen to music I PAID for, the way I want to–that removes the DRM on my songs, and I’ve decided to just resort to ripping DVDs to my computer since less than 1/3 of the DVDs I’ve bought, or had given to me, in the last year are compatible with the devices I use to legally watch them.

I’m sorry movie and music industry, but I’ve played by your rules and you need to get smart if you want most of society to abide by them. I’m sure I speak for many others when I say I’m getting tired of them…

Read more

Posted in Copyright Definition | No Comments »

Cease & Desist Letters, Threat Letters and Notice of Infringement Letters - What You Need to Know

March 23rd, 2009

A trademark or domain name threat letter is basically what it sounds like. It’s a letter or a sometimes an email from an alleged trademark owner with a threat to take legal action if you do not stop using their trademark registration, domain name, etc. A trademark is a word, symbol or phrase used to identify a particular manufacturer or sellers product and allow them to distinguish themselves from the product or services of another. So what happens, usually, is you get a letter from the trademark owner providing notice of trademark rights and demanding that you cease and desist use of the mark or domain name. Threat letter lawyers typically cite the federal Lanham Act and/or Anti-Cybersquatting Protection Act in support of the claim of a trade mark or service mark right violation.

Read more

Posted in Copyright Definition | No Comments »

The Movie & Music Industries Need to Get Smarter

March 22nd, 2009

This blog entry will not be a review about the movie Get Smart, although my experiences with watching the movie and trying to LEGALLY put it on my laptop have shown me something about the movie distributors, production company, the movie industry and its studios, or whoever.

In the last year or so, it’s become more common place, depending on the movie studio, to release DVDs with a legal ‘digital copy’ of a movie to put on your computer or media playing device, provided you go online or through their instructions, and usually provide a password or code they give you in the packaging of the DVD. But the basic idea is if you buy the DVD, you have a legal and “easy” way of putting the file on your computer without having to rip the disc or download the movie from a file sharing program.  A great solution the movie industry thought it had to the whole file sharing and piracy problem, right?

I travel a lot and like having my movies and CDs on my laptop and/or possibly my iPod, and the ‘backups’ are in boxes in my parents’ basement in Canada.  Being on long flights, and many churches increasingly creating video podcasts of their sermons, such a device was also convenient for that purpose. I’ve even gotten in the habit of renting movies in iTunes before going on a long flight, bus or train ride, or just when I’m going to be traveling or doing something that puts a lot of time on my hands.

Well, I come to find that in order to get the digital copy one has to use Windows Media Player, because the movie studio doesn’t co-operate with Apple or iTunes, and I own a MacBook. Now, I know I’m in the minority and that more people use Microsoft-based computers than Apple MacIntosh computers, but to the best of my knowledge, iPod devices and the iPhone make up over 70% of the total market for mp3 players and media sharing devices (this might even be a conservative estimate—I’ve heard much higher). The Microsoft Zune hasn’t even had an accumulated total number of units sold (in over 2 years) of just how many iPods Apple has in the last financial quarter of 2008 alone–for just one competitor’s example.

My point is this: if the big wigs at movie studios want to stop piracy, and have people legitimately buy or legally put their own property (the DVD) on a media playing device, why not give them the option of allowing it to be compatible with whatever device the consumer owns, instead of the one the studio determines? I realize competitiveness and the free market are at play in this situation, but still, this matter is quite stupid, because the very problem they’re trying to solve, they’re actually creating when consumers don’t use the software or the device they’ve made their digital copy compatible with.

What?  I can’t get the digital copy from my DVD of The Dark Knight?  Fine, I’ll just go to bit torrent to get it.

This causes many to go download programs from off the ‘net and just rip the DVD to their hard drive in mp4 format compatible with iPods.

I recently rented Get Smart (a very funny movie) on iTunes, and watched it to relax after work one night before going to bed. I enjoyed it (and recommend it since it was clean and almost no cussing or suggestive stuff, and it was FUNNY as heck). I suggested it to my brother the next day–we both were working together at the same place of employment. He gave me the idea to buy the DVD for him for Christmas, so I picked the one out from Future Shop that had a digital copy for a few dollars more than the normal edition, so I also could benefit from legally owning it as well.  In this case, the digital copy was compatible with iTunes, and with the 2nd disc and a connection to the internet one can download the video to their movie library in under five minutes if they have an iTunes account. This was a smart move on this movie supplier’s side to increase the ease with which consumers can access the digital copy should they want to. However, the DVD my brother bought for me for Christmas–The Dark Knight–is not compatible with iTunes or Apple despite being released by the same DVD supplier. *Sigh*

Why can’t ALL the movie industries out there ‘get smart’ about how they solve the problem of file sharing, torrents, and movie piracy by offering a solution that the average law abiding consumer will WANT to cooperate with, instead of making it so difficult and creating the rules for what devices and media players one has to already have in order to benefit from the digital copy on the disc?

I try abiding by their rules and legalities, but they make it so ridiculous and almost impossible to do the right thing (or just the thing they want) –it’s no wonder many people just go to file sharing and piracy to obtain the movies they’d like to watch! By the way, despite my ranting, it’s worth letting you know that the only movies on my laptop are ones that I’ve purchased in DVD form or had given to me, and the music I listen to is all purchased or from CDs or iTunes gift cards given to me. I’ve run into the same type of snag with the DRM on songs I’ve purchased online in that I can’t make mix mp3 CDs to listen to on my mp3 ghetto blaster at work.

I appreciate the effort the movie industries, and even the recording industry are trying to make, but it’s really ridiculous, and they need to get smarter about how they want the consumer to play along. I’ve gone and downloaded software to allow me to listen to music I PAID for, the way I want to–that removes the DRM on my songs, and I’ve decided to just resort to ripping DVDs to my computer since less than 1/3 of the DVDs I’ve bought, or had given to me, in the last year are compatible with the devices I use to legally watch them.

I’m sorry movie and music industry, but I’ve played by your rules and you need to get smart if you want most of society to abide by them. I’m sure I speak for many others when I say I’m getting tired of them…

Read more

Posted in Copyright Definition | No Comments »

« Previous Entries